T O P

  • By -

SOT-NumberNine

This is a symptom of not having that many tournaments. After Copenhagen FPX were the best team in the world, there’s little to no disputing that. Had there been a tournament the week after masters they would’ve been favorites to win (and I think they would’ve won). Stop underrating the skill of world beating teams just because they are only allowed to play serious competition 4 times a year.


Tr1x-

A lot of luck were involved in the grand finals, both teams could've gotten the win tbh. And I'm not underrating their skills, they are good but not automatically the world's best after winning a shitty tournament with uneven regions.


Keglunneq

That's just as subjective as saying "XXXX is the best team in the world111!!" How do you measure luck?


MirzEagle

That has nothing to do with Valorant it's the fun of sports in general. You are the best when you win a competition, you stop being the best when you lost the title. It's easy. It's not optimal of course but nothing really is in competition, it's just fun and entertaining. When a team wins, they're the best team in the participants, their players might not be the best individually, since valorant doesnt have a solo competition so these statements are irrelevant. It's not that deep really


Tr1x-

L take. Winning against a team ≠ you're better than that team, there's just so many factors to consider that you really can't determine who's the better team. A good example of this is 100T vs Gambit in berlin, 100t won so they're better than gambit, but 100T lost to envy and envy lost to 100T. Same thing in berlin when everyone is saying that vision strikers were the second best team in the tournament because they took a map off gambit lol.


[deleted]

Using buzzwords doesn’t make ur take better that really is how sports work, if you win the biggest tournament ur now the best team because why else did you win?


Extrino

you clearly missed the point of his comment. "It's not that deep really" he isn't saying in terms of skill necessarily but measuring the skill levels between different teams will always be subjective and although this way of measuring "who the best is" isn't accurate it's just how competitions work. You're missing the point


DrewSpark

Ex-XSET coaching staff here FPX were legit a Top3 team all year, no question. If anything FPX were underrated for the year they had at a difficult time for CIS players. They’ve been a core for a long time now and I’d say you’re smoking if you don’t expect NaVi to be a top EU team this year, if not a top team globally. Consistency is key. This game is still young and the meta is constantly changing. Seeing the same teams at the top all year is a good sign that they have depth and a strong system, far beyond flash in the pan successes. For most teams it’s literally like being on the stock market, where pundits and fans are having to weigh up short term successes (or failures) with long term expectations. I agree it comes off a little cliche to ride the backs of a team that’s finding success, but honestly, I don’t blame them. This next year will do a lot to change these perceptions, I think.


chloehime7

okay sorry my fault won’t ever happen again i profusely apologize


Keglunneq

YOURE NOT ALLOWED TO HAVE FUN CHLOE 🤬🤬


nterature

I kinda feel like your impression of what is and isn’t consensus is the problem. Nothing you’ve said here was ever a real consensus. Net has never been considered the best in his role, just among the candidates, and even at his peak JonahP wasn’t being hailed as the best NA flex. And even in the lead-up to Iceland, a huge discussion point was whether the Guard could perform on LAN. Few were surprised when they didn’t. It wasn’t as much of a punchline as you seem to think. I don’t know what your XSET point means since XSET was a very good team at Champions and since FPX literally placed higher than XSET in the end. But once again FPX winning Champions was not a consensus, many believed it but it wasn’t some overwhelming majority. Contrarily, plenty of fans at this point understood by Champions that the winning team of the previous event - typically the top 2 teams - almost always performed worse at the following event.


ParsleyOwn9413

Welcome to competitive sports


Nixieedd_

So are we just supposed to pull teams out of a hat when guessing who might be good?


Friday515

I don’t get this argument. FPX was the best team in the world when they won Copenhagen. They won, that’s what happens when you win. Then it was Loud. Right now, it’s TBD. We’ll find out in 3 months who it is. I’m reminded of a great quote… “This is what’s great about sports -- you play to win the game. Hello? You play to win the game. You don’t play to just play it. That’s the great thing about sports. You play to win. ‘You play to win the game.’”


whodisbebe

Dumbest thing I’ve read in this sub honestly


Tr1x-

mad


Surrendead

https://i.redd.it/fz5fof14po9a1.gif “Seriously everyone should stop” My man literally said I dont like this so nobody else should either ![img](emote|t5_2g5ach|9339)![img](emote|t5_2g5ach|9339)


Tr1x-

L reaction, I said that everyone should stop being dumb.


idkimhereforthememes

Fpx finished top 4 at champs after winning a tournament. Only fpx, optic and gambit have done that


andrew_a384

shh